IR Southern Zone - DiscussionForum For Rail fans with Discussions regarding various activities in Indian Railways(Mainly Southern Zone). NOTE: This site is not officially affiliated with Indian Railways.

The RTI Act was envisaged as a potent weapon to fight corruption by ushering in an age of transparency. Yet powerful men in power have ganged up to throttle the law through deliberate delays and by arm-twisting applicants. A comprehensive look at the law.

Aweapon in the hands of people. That was how the Right to Information (RTI) Act was envisaged, almost six years back. But the bureaucracy, in connivance with the wily political class, has managed to thwart the law, and frustrate its users.

At the time of its introduction, the RTI was described by lawmakers as an important milestone in efforts to bring in transparency in the system and a powerful weapon to fight corruption. But with people with vested interests ganging up to throttle the law, that dream appears, well, just a dream.

While the Information Commissioners harp on the success stories, there are cases wherein the Public Information Officers (PIO) deliberately sit on the RTI applications, not just for months, but years together.

That the PIOs deny information offering lame excuses is no longer news. But, there is a greater danger than just stonewalling information. In many cases, they are alleged to have passed on information about RTI queries to parties involved in corruption, thus placing the lives of the RTI applicants at grave risk.

In April 2009, an RTI activist Venkatesh was murdered and the assailants tried to pass it off as a road accident. When other activists raised a hue and cry, police swung into action. The investigation revealed that the ‘road accident’ was actually a murder. The killers were arrested. In another case, RTI activist S Channabasappa Patil was attacked grievously by two motorcycle-borne men in the busy Gandhinagar area of Bangalore. The most worrying case involved a PIO who was penalised for not furnishing information sought by Civic Bangalore, an NGO taking up RTI cases, attacking a member of the NGO just outside the Karnataka Information Commission (KIC) office.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court issued notice to the Railway ministry in a public interest litigation on the issue of unmanned crossings.

A division bench of Chief Justice SR Alam and Justice Alok Aradhe also issued notice to the Chairman Railway Board, the Chief Commissioner Security, Lucknow and DRM Jabalpur among others.

Petitioner SK Chaturvedi, through a RTI application, sought information about the number of railway crossings in India, number of manned and unmanned crossings, budget for the same and details of utilization as well as accidents over the last few years.

He was informed that total 35000 crossings exist in India of which 16000 crossings are without guards. In last seven years 1095 deaths had occurred in the crossings and 1010 of these occurred in unmanned crossings. He also found out that Rs.4000 crore has been sanctioned over the last seven years under the head of security arrangements but even half of the sanctioned amount remained unutilized.

The petition also urged that safety reports of new tracks were not being submitted as per norms.

NAGPUR: It is perhaps for the first time that the Nagpur division of Central Railway has officially admitted that its safety category staff is being misused.

The safety category employees from roadside stations in the division, who should be working outdoors ensuring passengers' safety, are indoors.

Information sought by TOI under the RTI Act not only exposes how senior railway officials misuse the machinery but also hide facts even from the media while providing information and are thus making a mockery of the law.

TOI had sought replies on six counts viz. number of operating department staff drawn from roadside depots and stations; stations employed where they were working against which post; whether they are paid admissible allowance and copy of the order.

Chief public information officer ( CPIO) not only furnished misleading information with the signatures of SK Das, assistant operating manager (AOM) but also delayed it. The registered application was despatched on June 24, 2011. It took 33 days to reach the DRM's office.

To a query, Das furnished information containing names of only 11 employees of whom seven belong to pointsman category. These seven employees from roadside stations have been shown as train clerks (TNCs) at control office. No official orders have been issued to these staffers in material form.

Does it indicate that there are eight vacancies in the TNC category and the safety category staff (pointsmen) are not required at their respective stations for safe train operation?

Senior operating manager (SrDOM) Mukul Kumar, with whose approval the information was supplied, is misleading. It is not only 11 safety category employees. TOI has a list of over 25 pointsmen from roadside stations who are based at Nagpur for years together.

These employees are not paid any admissible allowances. As per rules, these employees are posted at Nagpur from the original place of working and must be paid TA/DA. Most of these employees work in bungalows of officials and perform household cores like washing utensils and clothes.

Among the staff drawn from roadside stations is a young woman who is posted as gateman at Kalmeshwar, but works as a cook with divisional operating manager (DOM). Similarly, assistant station manager ( ASM) Nirupam Roy from Amla is shown as posted in Nagpur for six months but for the past 10 years he is working here. The information is false and misleading.

TOI has also identified some pointsmen who have retired now but had worked at officials' bungalows throughout their service period. They hardly worked against the assigned posts.

"Railway mishaps are at its peak. How can passenger safety be ensured if such a large number of safety department employees are misutilised for non-railway work," asked a senior safety department official.

Aggrieved persons will soon be able to seek help through a 24X7 toll free number, 1964, to be made functional by the Central Vigilance Commission.

According to country’s anti-corruption watchdog officials, the number will act as a one-stop solution for all complaints related to corruption.

“The anti-bribery helpline will assist complainants in their problems related to unnecessary lingering of work in a concerned government department due to demand of undue favours or gratification by public servants,” a CVC official said.

He said a full-fledged call centre will also be set up to provide services round the clock.

“People will be able to register complaints related to bribery being faced by them in all the central government ministries, departments and public sector units, among others,” the official said.

However, complaints related to Delhi Government or its departments will not be resolved through the proposed helpline or by the Commission since it does not come under its jurisdiction.

The number, 1964, assumes significance as the Central Vigilance Commission was set up in February 1964 by the government.

“We have worked out the technical modalities with the Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL). There are few things needed to be worked out with other stake holders. We plan to start it within two-months time,” the official said.

Presently, the CVC has a toll free number 1800-11-0180 and 011-24651000 which is operational between 9 a.m. and 7 p.m. from Monday to Friday.

We often sit down to draft an RTI application in an angry and unrealistic
mood. When we write RTI applications, our focus should be on getting
information. Instead, we are thinking about stopping some wrongdoings,
getting some officials and corrupt contractors penalized, making the
authorities "answerable" for negligence etc, etc. At such times, we fail to
think clearly about the items of information that we need.

Right to Information Act 2005 is a law, and effectiveness in legal work
depends on using the law without anger, resentment and wishful thinking.

* While asking for information, the 4 golden rules are:*

*a. **Point to various specific documents.* Your application should
look like a shopping-list of documents.

*b. **Name documents using words from Sec 2(f) and Sec 4(1)(b) *of the RTI Act - reports, logbooks, emails, advices, rules, regulations,
manuals etc. Only after exhausting these should you use other similar names e.g. quality audit reports, correspondence etc. In case this information is denied, the similarity of wordings will help you to convince appellate authorities that your requested information is "records" and "information" that must be mandatorily given.

*c. **Don't ask questions, don't demand explanations, and don't make allegations.* Don't make your application sound like a letter of complaint or a letter-to-the-editor. Don't preface it with a covering letter or an introductory paragraph. RTI applications should be emotionless and bland.

*d. **Avoid vague expressions* and requests such as

(a) *"What is the status of my complaint? What further action has been
taken on my complaint/letter?* *Give me action-taken report."* Words like "status" and "action" are open to interpretation, and usually fail to point towards any particular document; they can mean different things to
different persons like applicant, PIO, APIO and appellate authorities. In
most cases, there is no such document called "action-taken report" in
existence, and therefore, the PIO cannot be rightly asked under RTI to
generate such a document in reply to your application; PIO can only be
asked to give you copy of a document that exists. The right way is to ask
for signed and stamped copy of all correspondence till date in the matter
of your complaint, including memos, emails, covering letters for forwarding your complaint etc. Ask for copy of logbook or any other book where details of your complaint are entered, marked to specific officers for their investigation and action. Ask for a copy of all their remarks, feedback, reports etc. If the case on your complaint is closed, ask for the closing remarks of the officer concerned.

(b) *"Give particulars of the project to build XYZ."* What "particulars" do
you want? Engineering drawings? Budgets? Financial projections? Feasibility
reports? Consultants' studies? This is not clear. Don't leave it to the PIO
to decide what documents to include and what to leave out. Be specific and name the documents that you want copied. Make it difficult for the PIO to loosely interpret your request.

*Prepared by *

*Shri Sailesh Gandhi*

*Central Information Commissioner *

* *

*(Circulated in the interest of the public giving them tips to frame
good questions while submitting RTI Applications to get the information) *

A couple of days back, I received a letter from the DPO & PIO / MAS stating that the Loco Pilot Roster Links of MAS Division cannot be supplied as it is concerned directly with Public Safety and there is no larger public interest involved in the same (As per Section 8 (1) (j))

Aggrieved at this decision, I have filed a first appeal to the ADRM-II who is the Appellate Authority for MAS division explaining my position.

Applied single RTI requesting for many details regarding Maintanence, RSA, Earnings of SR and got the first reply from MDU division out of all others. I applied through OnlineRTI to RB and they forwarded it to SR and SR forwarded to all the 6 divisions.

MDU division said, the details regarding mechanical division would be sent by HQ, and the remaining details are in the website 'www.indianrailways.gov.in'. I have applied to appellate authority as the details in the website are outdated with MG details.

I need the following information under the RTI Act. Kindly provide the same.

1) I request you to provide the Passenger earnings and Parcel earnings of the Stations Chidambaram (CDM), MV, SY, PO, TDPR and CUPJ in the Financial years ( 2012-2013, 2013-2014 & 2014-2015 & 2015-2016)

2) I request you to provide the monthly statistics about Number of reserved class passengers (including Tatkal) traveled between 2a)Chennai Egmore to Chidambaram and 2b)Chidambaram to Madurai(MDU) , 2c) Chidambaram to Tirunelveli and 2d) Chidambaram to Tiruchendur 2e))Chidambaram -Chennai Egmore and 2f) Madurai - Chidambaram(CDM) , 2g) Tirunelveli-Chidambaram 2d) Tiruchendur-Chidambaram in 16105/16106 trains. Kindly provide the above count in monthy-wise for the years 2014-2015, and 2015-2016(Till Feb).

3) I request you to provide the monthly statistics about Number of reserved class passengers (including Tatkal) traveled between 3a)Tirupathi to Chidambaram 3b)Chidambaram to Madurai(MDU) 3c)Chidambaram to Rameswaram(RMM) and 3d)Chidambaram-Tirupathi 3e)Madurai(MDU) - Chidambaram 3f)Chidambaram to Rameswaram(RMM) in the 16779/16780 trains. Kindly provide the above count in monthy-wise for the years 2014-2015, and 2015-2016(Till Feb).
_________________Regards
-Anand kumar